Advanced Source operations course: candidate nomination guidance for commanders

by Colonel Jeffrey P. Stolrow

Introduction The HUMINT Training-Joint Center of Excellence (HT-JCOE) Advanced Source Operations Course (ASOC) is an extremely demanding 90-day training program. ASOC is not a "gentlemen's course." Students have described it as "MI Ranger School," in which they must successfully function under conditions of reduced sleep, mental strain, and physical fatigue in an often complex and ambiguous environment. Given the significant stress which is necessarily built into this course, it is not surprising that the attrition rate has historically averaged 21 percent. The significance of this attrition rate is evident when one considers that HT-JCOE conducts three ASOC iterations per year with a maximum of 42 students per course. Thus, the MI operating forces are losing between 28 to 32 ASOC Category I Military Source Operators per training year out of 126 candidates. As one of a several critical actions taken to decrease this attrition rate, HT-JCOE is providing commanders with comprehensive guidance to improve their capability to select suitable ASOC nominees for training. The nomination guidance which follows is based on an assessment and selection "whole person" theory first developed in World War II to assess and select Office of Strategic Services operatives. Rather than evaluating isolated elements of behavior, the whole person theory of assessment recommends that the assessor(s) evaluates a candidate on a variety of behavioral and situational measures. Then, the assessor(s) develops a comprehensive whole person assessment of the candidate based on the integration of these measures. The historical record of ASOC student performance suggests identifiable personal and situational factors which can predict those students who are more or less likely to graduate. This article high-lights these factors to assist commanders in making suitability decisions for ASOC attendance. It also recommends that commanders use a formal boarding process to assess potential candidates to attend ASOC and provides guidance on how to conduct a reliable and valid nomination board. I conclude with a brief review of ongoing ASOC assessment and selection research designed to better predict student performance and improve student training. Personal Factors Correlated with Successful and Unsuccessful Student Performance There are several personal factors associated with successful and unsuccessful ASOC student performance. These factors include motivation, aptitude, English oral and written communication skills, conscientiousness, prior experience and training, openness to new experience and feedback, and emotional stability.

Motivation. Motivation is defined as something that causes a person to act in a certain way or do a certain thing. Motion and effort are fundamental to motivation, as is inspiration. Motivation is also influenced by both intrinsic and extrinsic factors. ASOC students who are intrinsically motivated to attend the course are inspired by their own will to exert personal time, effort, and drive to succeed. The effort of this intrinsically motivated student comes from within and tends to be resistant to stress and environmental challenges. In contrast, extrinsically motivated students are driven by the demands of their external environment to succeed. Often, the primary force affecting student extrinsic motivation is unit personnel needs for ASOC graduates. In some cases, the unit may inform the student that continuing to work for the organization is dependent on graduating from ASOC. Extrinsically motivated students are more likely to lose their drive once they are away from their unit and lack the resiliency to cope with significant ASOC training stressors. In actual practice, the majority of ASOC students are both intrinsically and extrinsically motivated. However, self-reports from students who graduate suggest that intrinsic motivation is a significant factor contributing to graduation. In contrast, students who voluntarily withdraw will often cite various degrees of pressure from command as the key reason for attendance with little intrinsic motivation to participate in training. Such students are more likely to give up when the going gets tough. Commanders need to assess the relative strengths of both types of motivation. If the commander's estimate of a candidate's drive is predominantly intrinsic, then there is a higher probability that the candidate will be successful. If the candidate's drive is predominantly extrinsic, then there is a higher probability of failure. In some cases, commanders may desire a nominee to attend ASOC who is predominantly motivated by external factors. In this case, the commander should listen to the nominee, gain an accurate understanding of the needs and motives and attempt to reinforce the intrinsic drive (i.e., learning new skills, personal challenge, or how this person will make an even more important contribution to the unit and their country.) Providing factual information about the course with a positive attitude can also assist nominees to become "sold" on the course. Finally, ordering a unit member against their will to attend ASOC will most likely lead to course failure. It would be better to select another candidate who wants to attend for both the sake of the unit and ASOC. Aptitude. Aptitude is defined as the innate or acquired mental capacity to accomplish a particular task. It is also associated with readiness to learn and speed of information processing. As aptitude increases, individuals are more likely to quickly and accurately solve problems, successfully organize and plan complex tasks, and accurately execute a number of tasks sequentially or simultaneously. This mental "horsepower" is referred to as general mental ability, or GMA. GMA is associated with performance in both training and employment, such that higher levels of GMA are positively associated with more successful training outcomes and better job performance. In addition, there is a positive relationship between aptitude, as measured by intelligence tests, and memory.

The complex training demands of ASOC require a significant level of GMA to successfully complete the course. Preliminary data from cognitive testing administered to ASOC students suggests that students need above average levels of verbal and abstract abilities to graduate. Given that commanders will not normally have access to intelligence test scores, there are several readily available alternative assessment tools that provide a relatively accurate screening measure of GMA. These scores come from the Armed Forces Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) and include the General Technical (GT) score and the Skilled Technician (ST) score. Commanders should nominate unit members with a GT or ST score of 110 or greater. For maximum validity, commanders should request the unit member's GT or ST scores from their initial ASVAB test administration, which most likely was taken prior to entry into the military. Motivation and aptitude are essential factors that predict successful training performance, as well as success on the job. While sufficient levels of both factors are necessary for success, relatively higher levels of intrinsic motivation can compensate to some degree for relatively lower levels of aptitude. In assessing the "whole person," commanders will need to weigh these two factors carefully in their nomination decisions. English Oral and Written Communication Skills. ASOC instructors focus heavily on evaluating a student's English oral and written communication skills. Some questions commanders may ask themselves to evaluate a candidate's conversational ability might include: Can the candidate fluently begin and carry a conversation with subordinates, peers, and seniors? Does the candidate actively listen to others? Does the candidate have command of conversational English, especially if English is a second language? Does the candidate have a genuine interest in other people? The answers to these questions will assist the commander to make a reasoned judgment regarding the candidate's ability to relate to another person. Commanders can assess conversational proficiency through having face-to-face conversations with the candidate, getting feedback from the candidate's supervisors, and/or observing the candidate interact with others. ASOC students spend much of their time writing reports. These reports provide accurate feedback, evaluation, and synthesis of what took place during a given event. Students write their reports under time pressure from memory using a recommended format, complete sentence structure, correct spelling and punctuation, and acceptable grammar. The writing style should be succinct. Commanders can assess written language proficiency through work samples of the candidate's past written products. In addition, the commander can request a spontaneous, hand-written, one page work sample from the candidate without using a dictionary or writing style aid. The candidate should have a time limit to write the sample. Writing topics might include a discussion of the candidate's motivation, training, and/or experience which qualifies the candidate to attend ASOC. The ASOC training staff is highly motivated and adept at assisting students refine their conversational and written language skills. However, there is not enough time in the course to

successfully train a student to converse and/or write well if the student has entered the course with significant deficiencies in either language area. Conscientiousness. Conscientiousness pertains to a person's personality preference to be disciplined, systematic, punctual, and to plan ahead. It also refers to a need for achievement and a motivation toward goal-directed behavior. Research suggests that a higher level of conscientiousness is predictive of success in both training and employment settings. The ASOC curriculum is fast-paced, diverse, and incremental. Students must appropriately prioritize and allocate time to accomplish tasks, plan ahead in detail to execute these tasks, and work within strict time tolerances to accomplish the mission. Students who cannot perform to these standards are likely to fall further and further behind in the course. Preliminary ASOC assessment and selection data support the general research findings above and suggest that successful students have a somewhat higher level of conscientiousness in comparison to the general population. Commanders can assess conscientiousness through direct observation of the nominee, asking the nominee to describe how they have planned and completed a complex tasking, and/or getting feedback from supervisors on how a nominee organizes and executes tasks in the performance of their regular duties. Prior Experience and Training. One of the best predictors of future behavior is past performance. Past performance is based on experience and training. ASOC is an advanced military source operations course that assumes students have had the necessary prerequisite training and experience to quickly move ahead with the demanding curriculum. Review of past student performance suggests that there is a positive relationship between completion of one or more of the prerequisite courses coupled with HUMINT deployment experience and ASOC graduation. The minimum qualifications for ASOC attendance are listed in the prerequisites of the course in the HT-JCOE catalogue. In addition, the HT-JCOE Course Application requests that the nominee identify which of 18 training courses they have completed. Finally, the application requests that the nominee write an autobiography, which includes current and past duties and assignments, as well as deployment history. Commanders should make special note of these sections. If a candidate has not attended one of the prerequisite courses and/or has little HUMINT experience, it is strongly recommended that they acquire a basic level of HUMINT training and deployment experience first before attempting ASOC. There are infrequent occurrences where a commander has nominated an individual with little or no training or experience. In some cases, these nominees have excelled in ASOC, while others have not. If the commander is considering nominating such an individual, they should focus on the nominee's level of intrinsic motivation and aptitude as significant factors which might offset limited training and experience. High levels of both personal characteristics will help the nominee cope with the steeper learning curve and added stress of learning a novel course curriculum.

Openness to Experience and Feedback. Openness to experience refers to two associated dimensions: Openness to new ideas and openness to new actions. The preliminary ASOC assessment and selection data suggest that successful students must have at least an average level of openness in order to entertain new conceptual ideas and novel ways of conducting operations. The factor of openness also encompasses intellectual flexibility and familiarity with a range of cultural, scientific, or literary interests. Successful ASOC students are able to adjust themselves and their actions to the demands of novel situations, which occur frequently in their interaction with role players and the learning of new technical skill sets. In contrast, students with closed attitudes inhibit their learning of new material and often create more stress if they question the authority of the instructor. Deficits in mental flexibility and having a narrow range of intellectual interests make it difficult for students to adapt to the changing nuances of interpersonal interactions. ASOC instructors provide intensive feedback to students in the form of written reviews of performance, direct observation of behavior, and on-the-spot "in role" instruction. This feedback process is a key element of the course. Students must be open to assimilating and using performance feedback to improve performance and meet performance standards. Successful students have the capacity to listen to constructive feedback and change their behavior. They have a sufficient level of self-esteem to know that the feedback is focused on their objective performance and is not meant as a personal attack. Unsuccessful students tend to view constructive feedback as a personal assault, become defensive or discouraged, and fail to change their behavior. In some cases, students have reported that they have never before received so much critical feedback in a military training course. If the student is adaptive, they will overcome this initial emotional distress and recover to do well. Commanders can assess openness to new experience and feedback through prior interactions with the candidate and from getting feedback from supervisors. Commanders can also ask the candidate how they feel about making mistakes. Candidates who indicate that they must achieve the 100 percent solution and/or must be perfect or "Number One" may have a difficult time adjusting to ASOC's dynamic learning environment. Emotional Stability. Emotional stability is defined as a person's capability to react in an emotionally appropriate manner to various stressful conditions. Emotional stability has also been associated with hardiness and resiliency. ASOC students who are emotionally stable are likely to respond to unpredictable events with lower levels of anxiety, which helps to increase operational performance and confidence. They also make a faster emotional recovery after experiencing a stressful experience. Conversely, students who are vulnerable to emotional instability are more likely to respond reactively to the stress of the moment, more often through impulsive displays of emotion such as frustration, anger, or despondency. These emotional displays can lead to negative second and third order effects, to include aggressive behavior, disciplinary violations, and hopelessness. Preliminary ASOC assessment and selection research findings suggest that successful students score higher on measures of emotional stability in comparison to the general population.

ASOC guidance is very specific with regard to not accepting nominees who have prior integrity violations or criminal issues. Commanders can assess a unit member's emotional stability by verifying their past history, as legally appropriate, for administrative or judicial punishment, alcohol or drug abuse, misuse of credit, and/or illicit sexual relationships. Commanders can also use direct observation and supervisory feedback to make informed judgments about a candidate's emotional stability. This section reviewed seven personal factors of the candidate that can predict success or failure in ASOC. Motivation, specifically intrinsic motivation, is a key personal factor which is critical for success. However, all seven factors affect one another and cannot be viewed in isolation. For example, if a student lacks sufficient aptitude or emotional stability to cope with the stress of complex and ambiguous interpersonal interactions with role players, motivation cannot make up for these relative deficits and the student will fail. Taken together, these personal factors provide the commander with key information to help develop a "whole person" assessment of the candidate. In the next section, I discuss three situational factors which can also significantly affect student performance. Situational Factors Correlated with Successful and Unsuccessful Student Performance There are three situational factors which have been linked to student performance: family dynamics, to include financial stability; recent operational history, and command support. As with personal factors, each situational factor can have a significant positive or negative influence, either singly or in combination, on student success or failure. Family Dynamics. Family dynamics is defined as the relationships between the student and his immediate and extended family systems. The student's family system includes their spouse, children, parents, grandparents, and/or siblings. The historical evidence suggests that an ASOC student optimally have healthy and stable relationships with their family members, especially their spouse and children, to graduate from the course. Family dynamics also include financial stability. The lack of financial stability can quickly lead to marital conflict generated from high levels of debt and/or the lack of a financial reserve for monetary emergencies. The ASOC leadership has also found that when stress occurs in the family, the caregiver at home needs to have sufficient coping skills and supportive resources to handle the stressful event. As long as the caregivers believe they can effectively address the stressful situation and has the confidence of the student, it is likely that the student will successfully compartmentalize the problems at home and continue to advance satisfactorily in the course. An operational psychologist is on the ASOC staff to help all students cope with family crises. In contrast, students who have stressed relationships with significant others at home are likely to have serious problems attending ASOC if the stress of being away from home exacerbates the stressful home situation. For example, spouses have given ultimatums to students who have been deployed for multiple tours with little time at home and the added stress of facing another deployment upon course graduation. Children can also act out in the absence of parents and create difficult circumstances at school or home. In addition, students going through separation, divorce, or facing the imminent death of a close loved one can become justifiably distracted, which can lead to declining motivation and attention to the demands of ASOC.

If the commander believes that the candidate is experiencing serious family difficulties or will soon experience a serious family event such as the death of a terminally ill family member, they should discuss these issues with the candidate. Just as with deployments, difficult family situations do not get better with the absence of the student for 90 days in intensive training with limited communication back home. Commanders must use their experience and wisdom to accurately assess the situation and make an objective decision to nominate or withdraw a unit member from consideration. Recent Operational History. Many ASOC students have experienced multiple combat tours or other remote deployments. Even the most well adjusted student can re-experience combat-related stress as a result of course demands. Most students can manage this stress well by using previously successful coping strategies. In addition, training staff and the operational psychologist are available to help all students work through these normal reactions. However, some students have experienced so much combat that the aftermath of war interferes with their ability to effectively train under high stress. In addition, some students come to ASOC shortly after returning from a recent stressful deployment. They have not sufficiently decompressed from the deployment and carry their deployment stress into the training. Again, the interference with training can be significant and lead to course failure. In a previous section, it was noted that too much time away from home can cause serious interpersonal stress between family members. Recent operational history can also be a significant factor impacting this conflict. Commanders need to assess the candidate's recent operational history to determine the degree to which this history is impacting current individual behavior and the candidate's relationships with others. If the commander believes an otherwise acceptable candidate needs more decompression and/or if the candidate has strained family relationships, then it would be better to delay making the ASOC nomination. Command Support. Command support and how that support is perceived by the ASOC student can have a significant impact on course performance. Students tend to experience more confidence and bounce back faster from course setbacks when they believe their command will support them during and after the training. In practice, this kind of support might take the form of describing the course expectations and some of the skill sets the candidate will acquire during training. Another example of positive support includes a thorough assessment of the candidate as a "whole person" to determine if they are prepared for training and have the prerequisite training and personal characteristics to have a good chance of succeeding. Commanders can also help the student maintain task focus by striving to limit the student's involvement with unit duties and responsibilities, such as writing OERs, NCOERs, and awards, during ASOC attendance. Unfortunately, commanders can make it less likely that their students will graduate. Students who believe that their command "volun-told" them to attend have a lower probability of graduating the course. These students often feel angry that they are forced to come and lack the intrinsic motivation to persevere under stress. Another problem is when the command gives a covert message to the student that they will be a disgrace to the unit if they fail to graduate. Invariably, all students fail one or more incremental training tasks. Most students recover from these normal setbacks and progress with the training. However, students who believe they will be a disgrace become increasingly anxious with the mounting demands of the course. Rising levels

of performance anxiety lead to more performance mistakes, leading to more performance anxiety. These students literally "psych" themselves into failure. ASOC is a very demanding course, and it is designed in this manner because conducting Category I source operations is a highly sensitive and potentially dangerous mission with strategic implications for the U.S. government. Not everyone, no matter how well they have performed in other assignments, is suited to perform this mission. Nominees should have a good idea of what the training encompasses and what the real-world implications are of the training prior to attendance to make an informed decision on whether to proceed. Once a student is committed to the training, the command must do everything they can to support the student's success. Finally, if students do not graduate but have done their best without committing a disciplinary infraction, they are still an incredibly positive asset to their organization and should be welcomed by their command. By accurately assessing these situational factors and integrating them with the individual factors previously discussed, commanders can be assured that they have exercised due diligence using the "whole person" concept to select the best qualified nominees to succeed in ASOC. Next, some guidance on how to conduct a board designed to maximize selecting the right nominee for training. Conducting an ASOC Nominee Selection Board The following are recommendations for conducting a reliable and valid board to select ASOC nominees. First, commanders should keep these key questions in mind throughout the board process: * Can the candidate do the training? * Will the candidate do the training? * Will the candidate be accepted by their fellow professionals? The first question assesses the candidate's competencies, skills, and trainability. The second question addresses the candidate's type and level of motivation. The third question focuses on the candidate's personality preferences and their compatibility with others in the field. The board must satisfactorily answer all three questions to make an informed selection decision. The selection board should also be familiar with "behavioral" interviewing techniques. These techniques use a behaviorally based, performance driven interviewing procedure that requires the candidate to describe a specific work situation that occurred in the past, the action taken to deal with the situation, and the result/consequence of the action. For example, if the board wants to assess a candidate's decision making process, they might ask, "Tell us about a time that you made a decision that resulted in an unfavorable outcome. What steps did you use to make the decision? What was the outcome? What steps did you take to change your decision making process as a result of this experience?" The important point is that describing specific actual

situations that have no right or wrong answer provide the most reliable and valid information for predicting future performance. Board Procedures Board Composition. In most situations, the minimum number of personnel necessary to conduct a board is the unit commander and at least one other individual who is senior in rank to the candidate or, if junior in rank, works outside of the candidate's directorate or section. Duties of the President of the Board. The president of the board should review the criteria associated with successful and unsuccessful ASOC performance with the other board members before the board process begins. These criteria should include those personal and situational factors that help predict success or failure as described earlier in this article. The president also needs to identify the type(s) and degree of risk he/she is willing to take in selecting a nominee. All board members should be clear on both the "screening in" and "screening out" selection criteria, as this understanding will assist them in their line of questioning and ensure that their recommendations are consistent with the commander's philosophy. Pre-Interview Procedures. The interview room should be large enough to comfortably accommodate everyone. The board should take sufficient time to review the candidate's application and discuss any special issues identified by the board president. If the board is formal, remember to brief the candidate on how to report. Conducting the Interview. After the candidate reports, the president of the board should allow fellow board members to introduce themselves to the candidate. Then, the president of the board uses an "icebreaker" to begin the interview. A good example of an icebreaker is:
"Sergeant Smith, before we get started I'd like to say a few things. You can be very proud of your accomplishments up to this point. A select percentage of unit members qualify to attend this interview. The board members who will interview you today respect you for your drive and dedication to attend ASOC. So, regardless of the decision we reach whether to nominate you or not, you should be proud of the fact that you are here."

This icebreaker helps the candidate relax and increases the chances of a productive interview. In addition, this explanation helps the candidate to save face if the board votes to not nominate the candidate. Following the icebreaker, advise the candidate that the board is interested in honest and straightforward feedback, rather than remarks that are aimed at pleasing board members. Then, the board should begin interviewing the candidate about his/her motivation, past experience, emotional stability, etc. Use the behavioral interview technique described above to guide the interview. Avoid asking closed-ended questions, such as, "Do you like HUMINT?" In addition, avoid asking leading questions. An example of a leading question: "This unit only wants to nominate candidates who are not experiencing a lot of post-deployment stress. What is your level of post-deployment stress?" Post-Interview Discussion and Nomination Decision. When the interview is completed and the candidate has left the room, the board discusses how well the candidate met the designated

selection criteria, as well as any other significant observations that would assist in the nomination decision. Then, the board votes by secret ballot on the candidate and makes a nomination decision. Current ASOC Assessment and Selection Initiatives Thus far I have discussed personal and situational factors that influence ASOC graduation outcome, as well as a reliable and valid assessment and selection command board model to select the best qualified unit nominees. Now let's address current ASOC assessment and selection initiatives designed to improve both student selection and training. HT-JCOE has collaborated with a civilian personnel assessment and selection testing organization to develop and implement a comprehensive and secure on-line psychological assessment battery to evaluate ASOC students. Currently, all incoming students are required to take the assessment prior to beginning ASOC. The assessment collects and evaluates data on personal background, aptitude, and various dimensions of personality. To date approximately 90 students have completed the assessment, representing three ASOC iterations. The preliminary data previously discussed in this article were generated from this small number of student participants. Following several more iterations of data collection, HT-JCOE and ASOC will further analyze the data to determine reliable and valid discriminators that correlate with student success. This information can then be proactively used to assist ASOC in screening out candidates who are not likely to succeed in the course. Further, the group data will also be shared with commanders to help them make better decisions on selecting ASOC nominees, while maintaining absolute confidentiality of individual responses. Another assessment and selection initiative focuses on gathering similar aptitude and personality data from the ASOC training staff. The group data collected from the staff will be compared to the student group aptitude and personality data. The goal of this collection effort will be to determine similarities and differences between the two groups to assist the staff to provide training tailored to a better understanding student aptitude and personality preferences for learning. Conclusion Using the "whole person" concept to synthesize historical course data, instructor and student feedback, and preliminary student psychological assessment and selection data, this article has presented a number of personal student factors and situation variables which have demonstrated utility in predicting who is likely to succeed or fail in ASOC. This information represents the HT-JCOE and ASOC leadership's vested interest in providing commanders with practical guidance to assist them in making the right selection decision on whom to nominate for ASOC attendance. In addition, HT-JCOE and ASOC are focused on incorporating assessment and selection data to improve student selection and the quality of ASOC training which has always been student-centered. These mutually related initiatives will lead to better student selection decisions for unit commanders and ASOC, a lower student attrition rate, and a higher quality of student instruction.

Colonel Stolrow serves on the Special Staff of the USAICoE Commanding General, Fort Huachuca, as the USAICoE Command Psychologist. He provides direct support to USAICoE and HT-JCOE HUMINT training programs, to include psychological assessment and selection for students attending the ASOC. He holds a doctorate degree in Clinical Psychology from the California School of Professional Psychology-Los Angeles and is a U.S. Army War College graduate. He has conducted military psychological assessment and selection for over 18 years to include assignments at the U.S. Army Special Warfare Center and School, U.S. Army Special Operations Command, and the Joint Special Operations Command. COPYRIGHT 2010 U.S. Army Intelligence Center and School COPYRIGHT 2011 Gale, Cengage Learning